In the secular world fringe beliefs used to mean someone believed in UFO’s, alien abductions, and atheism. In today’s secular world fringe beliefs include demons, divine Creation, and lifetime marriage. What a difference a generation can make!

Within the church there have always been beliefs relegated to the shadowy world of the fringe. Accusations of being on the fringe sometimes drive Christians back to the orthodox center of their individual communities, though sometimes it encourages such ones to flee further away. Comments accusing fringe beliefs include: “You are unorthodox,” or “You belong to a liberal denomination,” or “What’s wrong with you? All Christians believe that!”

Martin Luther was certainly a fringe believer in his day. But who was the fringe in the 1st Century, Paul or the Judaizers? The Judaizers said, “Converts to Christianity must adhere to the continuity of the faith and follow the Law of Moses,” while Paul said, “The Law is discontinued and obsolete, circumcision is unnecessary, and the Sabbath Law is optional.”

But merely the charge of fringe belief is enough to scare some believers into withdrawal and inaction, while others lash back with fists swinging. Cessationists accuse Charismatic tongues speakers of being fringe, Charismatics accuse cessationists of not being saved until they speak in tongues, and everyone seems to accuse non-mystics (those who do not hear inner voices from God) of being unspiritual to the point of being entirely marginalized.

The test of “orthodoxy” should have nothing to do with accusations of being a Christian with fringe beliefs. The culture of the church community may define fringe as one thing today and as another thing tomorrow. Genuine orthodoxy has to do with whether a belief is truly biblical. That which is biblical is “sound doctrine” regardless of whether it is denounced as a fringe belief.

Today’s church must stop marginalizing Christians based on the shifting standards of its culture but must start judging doctrines on the basis of Scripture. And by Scripture, I mean Scripture taken in context and properly interpreted according to the best practices of applied hermeneutics. And those persons who believe in the sound doctrines of biblical theology must cease to withdraw from their peers out fear of being labeled “fringe” and defend their beliefs applying the principles of discernment and solid apologetics.

If we were willing to test all our beliefs against the Word, I suspect we would find that some of our favored personal beliefs are genuinely fringe after all. But others of our beliefs we thought to be fringe stand on the firm foundation of Scripture.

Was all of Martin Luther’s body of doctrine biblical? Certainly not. It is alleged that Luther upheld polygamy in certain situations (De Wette II, 329-330, 459), promoted anti-Semitic attitudes (see Martin Luther: The Jews and Their Lies--1543), embraced the ideas of the perpetual virginity and immaculate conception of Mary (see Martin Luther's Sermon "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," 1527 and Martin Luther's Little Prayer Book, 1522), and endorsed infant baptism (see The Large Catechism: XIIIA. Part Fourth Of Infant Baptism by Martin Luther). Contemporary fundamental evangelical Christians would generally and strongly oppose such doctrines.

Luther’s work was not and is not the standard of orthodoxy. Were some of Luther’s doctrines biblical? Absolutely! And what a huge debt is owed to Luther for his courage in being willing to be labeled “fringe” and worse Salvation by faith and not by works (or indulgences) is the very keystone of the Reformation and the core of all biblical/Pauline salvation doctrine.

What we need to be able to do is discern between unbiblical and biblical doctrines correctly and accurately. While simply being labeled “fringe” is virtually meaningless, maintaining sound biblical doctrine is both the didactic goal and a mandate of Christian education.

holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. (Titus 1:9)

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

“Root of Bitterness “ Is NOT What Most Think It Is

How often I have heard sermons and Sunday School lessons on preventing a “root of bitterness springing up which causes trouble and by it many are defiled.” It is assumed that this 1st Century phrase, root of bitterness, is a reference to a psychological embittering, the harboring of grudges. It is not.

See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be defiled; that there be no immoral or godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal. For you know that even afterwards, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears. (Hebrews 12:15-17)

The word “bitter” in this case is the Greek word for poison. Whatever this poisonous root is troubles and defiles many. But the root is equated to the sin of Esau. Esau traded away his birthright (which would have allowed him to legally inherit the promised land of Israel) for a temporary pleasure. In other words, Esau is being used here as a metaphor for a person who ought to have expected to be able to inherit eternal life (the promised land) but who has rejected their faith in Christ and so given up eternal life.

This passage is actually referencing Deuteronomy 29:18-21.

so that there will not be among you a man or woman, or family or tribe, whose heart turns away today from the LORD our God, to go and serve the gods of those nations; that there will not be among you a root bearing poisonous fruit and wormwood. It shall be when he hears the words of this curse, that he will boast, saying, 'I have peace though I walk in the stubbornness of my heart in order to destroy the watered land with the dry.' The LORD shall never be willing to forgive him, but rather the anger of the LORD and His jealousy will burn against that man, and every curse which is written in this book will rest on him, and the LORD will blot out his name from under heaven. Then the LORD will single him out for adversity from all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant which are written in this book of the law. (Deuteronomy 29:18-21)

So Hebrews 12:16-17 might best be read as:

“See to it that no one in your church comes short of salvation; that is, that no person in the church becomes a poisonous root of unbelief springing up within the congregation and causing trouble, defiling many by spreading unbelief.” (Hebrews 12:15, paraphrase mine)

----------------

Note: I was tempted to add the phrase from Deuteronomy 29:20, “The Lord shall never be willing to forgive him,” to the end of the Hebrews 12:15 paraphrase, but thought that doing so would be taking too much inappropriate liberty with Scripture by sewing a patch of old Law on top of new grace. God can and does forgive even the worst of sinners, rebels, atheists, heretics, and troublemakers when they call upon Him with genuine repentance. So the paraphrase stands.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Ten More Allegations of Biblical Errors

Introduction

A Xanga blogger, kristenmomof3, posted the following allegations that some prophecies of the Bible have failed (http://kristenmomof3.xanga.com/755329549/failed-prophecies/ ). Unlike past such lists, there are a few genuine head-scratching assertions in this one.

kristenmomof3’s allegations against the Bible are exact quotations in her words except for the “Allegation #.” I added these numbers for ease of reference.

Allegations of Biblical Errors

Allegation 1) Isaiah 17:1 "An oracle concerning Damascus: See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins."
FAIL: Damascus is still inhabited today with well over a million people and there was never a time where it ceased to be a city. It is widely known as being the oldest continuously inhabited city in the world.

Allegation 2) Isaiah 19:4-5 "I will hand the Egyptians over to the power of a cruel master, and a fierce king will rule over them, declares the Lord, the LORD Almighty. The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbed will be parched and dry."
FAIL: The river mentioned here is the Nile which never dried up and is still one of Egypt's greatest natural resource.

Allegation 3) Isaiah 52:1 "Awake, awake, O Zion, clothe yourself with strength. Put on your garments of splendor, O Jerusalem, the holy city. The uncircumcised and defiled will not enter you again."
FAIL: There are still uncircumcised people living in Jerusalem even today.

Allegation 4) Ezekiel 30:10-11 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will put an end to the hordes of Egypt by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. He and his army - the most ruthless of nations - will be brought in to destroy the land. They will draw their swords against Egypt and fill the land with the slain."
FAIL: Ezekiel predicts that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon will conquer Egypt utterly destroying it, slaying and scattering its people. In 568 BCE Nebuchadnezzar tried to conquer Egypt and Egypt survived with no apparent damage. Aahmes ruled for another generation over a prosperous Egypt and lived to see Nebuchadnezzar die. The Egyptians were not scattered or dispersed.

Allegation 5) Ezekiel 29:10-11 "therefore I am against you and against your streams, and I will make the land of Egypt a ruin and a desolate waste from Migdol to Aswan, as far as the border of Cush. The foot of neither man nor beast will pass through it; no one will live there for forty years."
FAIL: Never in its long history has Egypt been uninhabited for forty years.

Allegation 6) Matthew 16:28 "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." 23:36 "I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation." 24:34 "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
FAIL: Jesus states in Matthew that all the signs marking the end of the world would be fulfilled before his generation ended, before the people that were standing infront of him "taste death." Those people have been dead for over 2000 years and the world did not come to an end, neither have all those signs been fulfilled.

Allegation 7) The Bible says Joshua destroyed the wall of Jericho around 1400 BCE but Archaeological evidence shows that an earthquake destroyed the wall in 2300 BCE. The city was also thoroughly destroyed by a fire and then abandoned in 1600 BCE. Jericho was not inhabited again until 700 BCE. There was no wall to tumble down or citizens to destroy at Jericho within centuries of when the Bible says Joshua was there.

Allegation 8) Matthew 27:52-53 claims that when Jesus died graves were opened as zombies rose from them and this was seen by many people. If a city under Roman occupation was invaded by zombies don't you think at least one contemporary historian would have written about it? Needless to say, there is not one historical documentation of an actual zombie uprising.

Allegation 9) The Bible does not say what year Jesus was born but it does tell us during which specific historical events his birth took place. Matthew says Jesus was born in Judea during the reign of Herod the Great and Luke says Jesus was born during the major tax census while Quirinius was governor of Syria. These are both documented historical events but they are also separated by at least 10 years making it historically impossible for Jesus to be born during both events.

Allegation 10) The Bible places the events of its Tower of Babel story around 1000 BCE. According to Genesis before this time "the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech". In reality there were many spoken and written languages prior to the Tower of Babel events. Chinese was developed prior to 1200 BCE and speakers of several Semitic languages developed the abjab and consonantal alphabet prior to 1500 BCE. The oldest known text in the Sanskrit language, the Rigveda, dates to 1700-1100 BCE. Egyptian hieroglyphs date back to about 3100 BCE and Sumerian writings date as far back as 3200 BCE.

Responses to Allegations

My responses are below:

1) Fall of Aram: Isaiah 17:1-3

This prophecy, made years before the events happened, that Aram, who was allied with Egypt at the time, would not defeat Judah (the southern Jewish kingdom). In fact, Aram was defeated per Isaiah’s prophecy and Judah was therefore made safe for a time.

As to the detail that Damascus would be ruined, “Damascus is about to be removed from being a city and will become a fallen ruin,” the word “city” can be a metaphor for a national entity (like calling the US government “Washington”) or even a “court” (like calling all of Great Britain the queen’s court). Indeed, king Aram’s government in Damascus was ruined. Nothing in this passage says that the city proper would never be rebuilt or never reinhabited. So the prophecy occurred as predicted.

2) The Nile will dry up: Isaiah 19:1-10

The first verse, 19:1, indicates that this is an end-of-time prophecy when Jesus comes on the clouds of the sky to reclaim the earth for Himself, His second coming. Of course, it is on the basis of being unable to understand passages such as this as being end-of-time prophecies which caused the Jews to expect the coming Messiah to be a conquering king and not a suffering and crucified servant. However, since Jesus already explained passages such as this as pertaining to His second coming there remains little excuse for contemporary Bible students to misunderstand Isaiah 19:1-10.

3) Only believing Jews will govern in Jerusalem: Isaiah 52:1-7

This is a prophecy at the end-of-time when Jesus returns to claim the earth (see 52:6)

4 and 5) Egypt’s Nile delta capital will be attacked and left desolate for 40 years: Ezekiel 29:1-14

This prophecy is more problematic for unbelievers than for believers, I will explain why later.

History indicates that Babylon did invade the Egyptian Nile delta, the seat of Egyptian power. No archeological evidence is available to prove that Babylon was successful in conquering the capital and enslaving a significant portion of its population (as it did with Israel) and no archeological evidence is available to prove that Babylon was unsuccessful. Lack of archeological evidence for one outcome or the other cannot automatically be cited as evidence that the prophecy failed. Whether the attack was successful or not, there is no indication in the text that Egypt’s king would be killed or captured, merely driven out of the capital for a time.

It is naïve to assert that the delta and Nile have remained unchanged in governance and geography or unimpacted by climate for its entire history. Pliny wrote that the delta once had 7 tributaries from the Nile, only 2 of which exist today. Recent archeology has discovered that an entire Egyptian city was deconstructed and moved stone-by-stone because the Nile tributaries had silted over and/or dried up cutting off the water supplies to this government center. Other government-subsidized cities in the desert were simply abandoned and left desolate.

If this prophecy was written before Egypt was attacked by Babylon (as believers assert) it is a striking prediction in advance of a demonstrated historical incident and reinforces the divine nature of prophecy. If this prophecy was written after Egypt was attacked (as unbelievers allege) then it seems inexplicable that the prophet who was simply retelling history would assert that the hated Babylonians succeeded when everyone in his day should have known they had failed. This prophecy is more of a problem for the unbeliever than the believer.

6) Multiple references to different generations seeing events in the last days: Matthew 16:28, 23:36, 24:34

There is no merit in once again addressing this well documented set of comments. In each of the above comments Jesus is referencing different generations who see different things. The problem is that the “kingdom of God” was both present at the time of John the Batist and Jesus (see Matthew 11:12) and will have its ultimate consumation when Jesus returns in power to take back the earth (Matthew 26:29). So, the kingdom was present in some glory in the 1st Century, and those present saw glimpses of it (see Matthew 17:2), and it will be established in even more glory when Jesus returns.

7) Jericho experienced devastating disasters before Joshua invaded, so Joshua did nothing to take the city.

Archeology does not “prove” that Jericho had no walls circa 1400 B.C., rather, some archeologists theorize that Jericho had undergone a series of pre-1400 B.C. disasters. Nonetheless, these disasters which likely occurred between 200 and 900 years before Joshua arrived beg the question as to how well the walls had been rebuilt before the final overthrow of the famed fortified city. By way of comparison it took quite a few years for Jerusalem’s walls to be fully rebuilt after the Babylonian captivity.

8) Why did historians not write of the resurrections that happened at the same time when Jesus raised? Matthew 27:52-53

To our knowledge no secular or Roman historians lived in Jerusalem proper in the year A.D. 33. Israel was a backwater outpost of Rome and not a thriving cultural center, thus drawing little attention from Rome's elite. Jesus’ execution was recorded in Rome, presumably by report sent from Pilate, but few written records survived the destruction of Jerusalem itself in A.D. 70. Moreover, it is doubtful that many who had not seen the event with their own eyes would have believed these reports that the dead had raised, so the historians of the day would have had little motive to write about them.

9) Is there not a date discrepancy between Luke and Matthew on when Jesus was born?

Yes and no. All parties in this debate make massive numbers of assumptions to “prove” there is a discrepancy or that there is not. The variables that make a definitive answer impossible are: which Roman census is being referenced (there were three in the Palestine area between 8 B.C. and A.D. 14), how many of the multiple censuses did Quirinius oversee or administer and was he an actual governor for all of them, and was Josephus making reference to the A.D. 7 census or another one? Without firm data there is insufficient evidence to conclude anything in this matter.

10) Does the Bible really date the Tower of Babel at 1000 B.C. and thus contradict much of written human history?

No it does not. I have no idea where that absurd allegation of 1000 B.C. originates. As contemporary theologians have demonstrated repeatedly the chronologies / geneaologies in the Jewish Scriptures are intentionally incomplete, including only those family names that are of extreme theological importance or historical interest. Therefore, events in Genesis 10-11 could theoretically date to as early as 3500 B.C. to more likely dates falling into the range from as long ago as 60,000 B.C. or later.

Concluding Comment

It is too bad that so many allegations of biblical inaccuracies are presented based on pure imagination (see 10), poor research (see 4-5), or merely misreading the scriptural texts (see 2 and 3). Some legitimate questions are raised, such as how well could Jericho’s residents have rebuilt its walls in just 200 years before the Jews invaded, but such questions do little to disprove the authenticity and truth of the biblical texts. Demonstrating true error will take far more than innuendo and wishful thinking on the part of those who do not believe. Nonetheless, the above list was far better a challenge than most I have encountered.